Poll: Paterson's Numbers In The Gutter -- Worse Than Spitzer During Scandal
The new Marist poll has some truly horrible news for David Paterson, saying that he could lose both primary and general elections in landslides.
In a primary against Andrew Cuomo, Paterson is behind by an amazing 62%-26% margin. In a general election match-up with Rudy Giuliani, Paterson gets crushed by 53%-38%, while Cuomo beats Rudy by 56%-39%.
The poll is a whole lot better for newly-appointed Senator Kirsten Gillibrand, though it's not great. Gillibrand edges former GOP Governor George Pataki 45%-41%, and is ahead of GOP Congressman Peter King 49%-28%. In a Democratic primary, Gillibrand is in a near-tie with pro-gun-control Congressman Carolyn McCarthy, with 36% for Gillibrand and 33% for McCarthy.
Here's a sign of just how awful Paterson's ratings are: His approval numbers are worse than Eliot Spitzer's were, when he was in the middle of the prostitution scandal that forced his resignation. Just before he resigned, Spitzer had a 30% excellent/good rating and 64% fair/poor in the Marist poll. By comparison, Paterson is at only 26%-71%.
Another person to feel sorry for here is former Congressman Rick Lazio (R), who ran against Hillary Clinton for the Senate in 2000 -- he actually manages to trail Paterson in a possible gubernatorial match-up by a 47%-35% margin.
Josh
Elana
Matt
Eric
Paterson is obviously regarded as having really jerked around JFK's daughter. If you are going to beat up on a girl to begin with (or mistreat her), it's bad juju to begin with, but at least choose your victim carefully.
March 3, 2009 12:07 PM | Reply | Permalink
It has much more to deal with his budget proposal than the CK debacle. He basically managed to alienate every corner of the political spectrum with some major part of his planned budget.
March 3, 2009 12:21 PM | Reply | Permalink
Okay, and altogether it sounds like a whole-lot-of-alientin'-goin'-on! :)
March 3, 2009 1:11 PM | Reply | Permalink
Can you give us an example of a controversy regarding the proposed budget?
March 3, 2009 1:17 PM | Reply | Permalink
Paterson's numbers are exactly where they should be. The man is a disaster! He had the opportunity to turn the Senate appointment into a plus for him but he completely botched it.
He dragged it out and made himself look petty and indecisive and just plain weird. Then he had his hit men put out lies on Kennedy that ultimately got traced back to him.
Then he picked a Blue Dog Democrat in a liberal state!!--from a district we're now probably going to lose. And that same Blue Dog is going to get challenged in the primary and fracture the party.
Add to that the fact that he's also alienated the Kennedys, Cuomos and Clintons and Obamas in one fell swoop.
This guy is a loser with NO political skill. I hope he gets beat in the primary or decides to step down. Otherwise, NY will have a republican governor.
March 3, 2009 3:10 PM | Reply | Permalink
Another person to feel sorry for here is former Congressman Rick Lazio (R), who ran against Hillary Clinton for the Senate in 2000
I find this bizarre, to say the least. Lazio has been out of the public eye for some time now, hasn't he?
If these numbers remain this way, I'd say that that little finger pointing trip Lazio took in the debate has had serious long term implications.
March 3, 2009 12:12 PM | Reply | Permalink
Gillibrand will win re-election, Paterson is going down in flames.
March 3, 2009 12:23 PM | Reply | Permalink
Heh heh, maybe a little context next time, Eric. Not everyone knows what Paterson you are talking about (2000+ miles from New York here in New Mexico!) implicitly. Of course, I could just be slow today.....
March 3, 2009 12:31 PM | Reply | Permalink
Sorry. New Mexico belongs in the "rest of the country" region just over the Hudson. . .
March 3, 2009 12:45 PM | Reply | Permalink
Cool New Yorker reference :-)
March 3, 2009 1:06 PM | Reply | Permalink
also the article never mentions which election we're talking about. should it really go without sayingthat we're already talking about the 2010 election?
March 3, 2009 3:09 PM | Reply | Permalink
true.
March 3, 2009 3:24 PM | Reply | Permalink
Those commercials produced by the union, I think the SEIU, don't help either. But Dear God I would have him over Rat Face Rudy any day.
March 3, 2009 12:33 PM | Reply | Permalink
Wasn't McCarthy cleaning Gillibrand's clock in a poll about a week or two ago?
March 3, 2009 1:02 PM | Reply | Permalink
Senator Kirsten Gillibrand is good for the Democratic Party. Private ownership of firearms is a civil right, and her position on the Second Amendment should be respected, so long as she doesn't endorse an extreme position on the right to bear arms, such as citizens having the legal right to possess a machine gun, a fragmentation grenade, or a shoulder-launched missile.
March 3, 2009 1:36 PM | Reply | Permalink
She would be good for the Democratic party if she was from North Carolina or Virginia. But NY? No way. That's one state where we could have a real liberal in the senate. Why give the seat to a conservative. We have enough of them. In fact, too many of them.
March 3, 2009 3:13 PM | Reply | Permalink
Nah, Paterson is a B-grade politician who only made it to the Governor's office because Spitzer came a cropper.
Sometimes pols are able to rise above their predecessor in that circumstance, but they mostly fail to do so. Teddy Roosevelt and LBJ did, but its not automatic by any means.
March 3, 2009 2:43 PM | Reply | Permalink
Boy, when you look at all the potentially good Democrats we lost because he or some other related Democrat couldn't keep it in his pants:
Spitzer, Edwards; Bill Clinton ---> Al Gore
We need some sort of "reverse Viagra" to administer to these fools.
March 3, 2009 3:32 PM | Reply | Permalink
"He dragged it out and made himself look petty and indecisive and just plain weird. Then he had his hit men put out lies on Kennedy that ultimately got traced back to him."
Yeah, that's what I had in mind. You just put it much better!
I'm far away from the action, but I do think Gillibrand might have been a good pick. Republicans will love to win her district, though, and if they do, it will all be part of a painful narrative about the rebirth of Republicanism, with sharp-eyed captains like Limbaugh, Palin, Jindal, at the helm of the ship of state. That would make for some pretty shrill press, I gotta say.
March 4, 2009 6:56 AM | Reply | Permalink